Job 26:2-27:12 | KD | STEP | Then Job began, and said: 2 How has thou helped him that is without power, Raised the arm that hath no strength! 3 How hast thou counselled him that hath no wisdom, And fully declared the essence of the matter! 4 To whom hast thou uttered words, And whose breath proceeded from thee? Bildad is the person addressed, and the exclamations in , are ironical: how thy speech contains nothing whatever that might help me, the supposedly feeble one, in conquering my affliction and my temptation; me, the supposedly ignorant one, in comprehending man’s mysterious lot, and mine! ללא־כח, according to the idea, is only equivalent to כח לו (אין) לאשׁר לא, and זרוע לא־עז equivalent to זרוע בלא־עז (לא עז לו); the former is the abstr. pro concreto, the latter the genitival connection - the arm of the no-power, i.e., powerless (Ges. §152, 1). The powerless one is Job himself, not God (Merc., Schlottm.), as even the choice of the verbs, , , shows. Respecting תּוּשׁיּה, which we have translated essentiality, duration, completion, we said, on , that it is formed from ישׁ (vid., ), not directly indeed, but by means of a verb ושׁי brev a fo (ושׁה), in the signification subsistere (comp. Arab. kân , and Syriac קום); it is a Hophal -formation (like תּוּגה), and signifies, so to speak, durability, subsistentia, substantia, ὑπόστασις, so that the comparison of ושׁי with אשׁשׁ, Arab. 'ss (whence אשׁישׁ, Arab. ası̂s , asâs , etc., fundamentum ) is forced upon one, and the relationship to the Sanskrit as ( asmi = εἰμὶ) can remain undecided. The observation of J. D. Michaelis to the contrary, Supplem . p. 1167: non placent in linguis ejusmodi etyma metaphysica nimis a vulgari sensu remota; philosophi in scholis ejusmodi vocabula condunt, non plebs, is removed by the consideration that תושׁיה, which out of Prov. and Job occurs only in , Mich. , is a Chokma-word: it signifies here, as frequently, vera et realis sapientia (J. H. Michaelis). The speech of Bildad is a proof of poverty of thought, of which he himself gives the evidence. His words - such is the thought of - are altogether inappropriate, inasmuch as they have no reference whatever to the chief point of Job’s speech; and they are, moreover, not his own, but the suggestion of another, and that not God, but Eliphaz, from whom Bildad has borrowed the substance of his brief declamation. Since this is the meaning of , it might seem as though את־מי were intended to signify by whose assistance (Arnh., Hahn); but as the poet also, in , comp. , uses הגּיד seq. acc., in the sense of explaining anything to any one, to instruct him concerning anything, it is to be interpreted: to whom hast thou divulged the words (lxx, τίνι ἀνήγγειλας ῥήματα), i.e., thinking and designing thereby to affect him? In what follows, Job now continues the description of God’s exalted rule, which Bildad had attempted, by tracing it through every department of creation; and thus proves by fact, that he is wanting neither in a recognition nor reverence of God the almighty Ruler.

‏ Job 26:2-14

Job 26:1-4 1 Then Job began, and said: 2 How has thou helped him that is without power,

Raised the arm that hath no strength! 3 How hast thou counselled him that hath no wisdom,

And fully declared the essence of the matter! 4 To whom hast thou uttered words,

And whose breath proceeded from thee?

Bildad is the person addressed, and the exclamations in Job 26:2, Job 26:3 are ironical: how thy speech contains nothing whatever that might help me, the supposedly feeble one, in conquering my affliction and my temptation; me, the supposedly ignorant one, in comprehending man’s mysterious lot, and mine! ללא־כח, according to the idea, is only equivalent to כח לו (אין) לאשׁר לא, and זרוע לא־עז equivalent to זרוע בלא־עז (לא עז לו); the former is the abstr. pro concreto, the latter the genitival connection - the arm of the no-power, i.e., powerless (Ges. §152, 1). The powerless one is Job himself, not God (Merc., Schlottm.), as even the choice of the verbs, Job 26:2, Job 26:3, shows. Respecting תּוּשׁיּה, which we have translated essentiality, duration, completion, we said, on Job 5:12, that it is formed from ישׁ (vid., Pro 8:21), not directly indeed, but by means of a verb ושׁי brev a fo (ושׁה), in the signification subsistere (comp. Arab. kân, and Syriac קום); ^{▼▼Comp. also Spiegel, Grammatik der Huzväresch-Sprache, S. 103.} it is a Hophal-formation (like תּוּגה), and signifies, so to speak, durability, subsistentia, substantia, ὑπόστασις, so that the comparison of ושׁי with אשׁשׁ, Arab. 'ss (whence אשׁישׁ, Arab. ası̂s , asâs , etc., fundamentum) is forced upon one, and the relationship to the Sanskrit as (asmi = εἰμὶ) can remain undecided. The observation of J. D. Michaelis ^{▼▼Against the comparison of the Arab. wâsâ , solari, by Michaelis, Ges., and others (who assume the primary significations solatium, auxilium), Lagarde (Anmerkungen zur griech. Uebersetzung der Proverbien, 1863, S. 57f.) correctly remarks that Arab. wâsâ , is only a change of letters of the common language for Arab. âsâ ; but Arab. wâšâ, to finish painting (whence Arab. twšyt, decoration), or ושׁה as a transposition from שׁוה, to be level, simple (Hitzig on Pro 3:21), leads to no suitable sense.} to the contrary, Supplem. p. 1167: non placent in linguis ejusmodi etyma metaphysica nimis a vulgari sensu remota; philosophi in scholis ejusmodi vocabula condunt, non plebs, is removed by the consideration that תושׁיה, which out of Prov. and Job occurs only in Isa 28:29, Mich. Job 6:9, is a Chokma-word: it signifies here, as frequently, vera et realis sapientia (J. H. Michaelis). The speech of Bildad is a proof of poverty of thought, of which he himself gives the evidence. His words - such is the thought of Job 26:4 - are altogether inappropriate, inasmuch as they have no reference whatever to the chief point of Job’s speech; and they are, moreover, not his own, but the suggestion of another, and that not God, but Eliphaz, from whom Bildad has borrowed the substance of his brief declamation. Since this is the meaning of Job 26:4, it might seem as though את־מי were intended to signify by whose assistance (Arnh., Hahn); but as the poet also, in Job 31:37, comp. Eze 43:10, uses הגּיד seq. acc., in the sense of explaining anything to any one, to instruct him concerning anything, it is to be interpreted: to whom hast thou divulged the words (lxx, τίνι ἀνήγγειλας ῥήματα), i.e., thinking and designing thereby to affect him?

In what follows, Job now continues the description of God’s exalted rule, which Bildad had attempted, by tracing it through every department of creation; and thus proves by fact, that he is wanting neither in a recognition nor reverence of God the almighty Ruler. Job 26:5-7 5 - The shades are put to pain

Deep under the waters and their inhabitants. 6 Sheôl is naked before him,

And the abyss hath no covering. 7 He stretched the northern sky over the emptiness;

He hung the earth upon nothing.

Bildad has extolled God’s majestic, awe-inspiring rule in the heights of heaven, His immediate surrounding; Job continues the strain, and celebrates the extension of this rule, even to the depths of the lower world. The operation of the majesty of the heavenly Ruler extends even to the realm of shades; the sea with the multitude of its inhabitants forms no barrier between God and the realm of shades; the marrowless, bloodless phantoms or shades below writhe like a woman in travail as often as this majesty is felt by them, as, perhaps, by the raging of the sea or the quaking of the earth. On רפאים, which also occurs in Phoenician inscriptions, vid., Psychol. S. 409; the book of Job corresponds with Psa 88:11 in the use of this appellation. The sing. is not רפאי (whence רפאים, as the name of a people), but רפא (רפה), which signifies both giants or heroes of colossal stature (from רפה = Arab. rafu‛a , to be high), and the relaxed (from רפה, to be loose, like Arab. rafa'a , to soften, to soothe), i.e., those who are bodiless in the state after death (comp. חלּה, Isa 14:10, to be weakened, i.e., placed in the condition of a rapha). It is a question whether יחוללוּ be Pilel (Ges.) or Pulal (Olsh.); the Pul., indeed, signifies elsewhere to be brought forth with writing (Job 15:7); it can, however, just as well signify to be put in pain. On account of the reference implied in it to a higher causation here at the commencement of the speech, the Pul. is more appropriate than the Pil.; and the pausal â, which is often found elsewhere with Hithpael (Hithpal.), Psa 88:14; Job 33:5, but never with Piel (Pil.), proves that the form is intended to be regarded as passive. Job 26:8-10 8 He bindeth up the waters in His clouds,

Without the clouds being rent under their burden. 9 He enshroudeth the face of His throne,

Spreading His clouds upon it. 10 He compasseth the face of the waters with bounds,

To the boundary between light and darkness.

The clouds consist of masses of water rolled together, which, if they were suddenly set free, would deluge the ground; but the omnipotence of God holds the waters together in the hollow of the clouds (צרר, Milel, according to a recognised law, although it is also found in Codd. accented as Milra, but contrary to the Masora), so that they do not burst asunder under the burden of the waters (תּחתּם); by which nothing more nor less is meant, than that the physical and meteorological laws of rain are of God’s appointment. Job 26:9 describes the dark and thickly-clouded sky that showers down the rain in the appointed rainy season. אחז signifies to take hold of, in architecture to hold together by means of beams, or to fasten together (vid., Thenius on 1Ki 6:10, comp. 2Ch 9:18, מאחזים, coagmentata), then also, as usually in Chald. and Syr., to shut (by means of cross-bars, Neh 7:3), here to shut off by surrounding with clouds: He shuts off פּני־כסּה, the front of God’s throne, which is turned towards the earth, so that it is hidden by storm-clouds as by a סכּה, Job 36:29; Psa 18:12. God’s throne, which is here, as in 1Ki 10:19, written כּסּה instead of כּסּא (comp. Arab. cursi, of the throne of God the Judge, in distinction from Arab. 'l - ‛arš , the throne of God who rules over the world), ^{▼▼According to the more recent interpretation, under Aristotelian influence, Arab. 'l - ‛rš is the outermost sphere, which God as πρῶτον κινοῦν having set in motion, communicates light, heat, life, and motion to the other revolving spheres; for the causae mediae gradually descend from God the Author of being (muhejji) from the highest heaven into the sublunary world.} is indeed in other respects invisible, but the cloudless blue of heaven is His reflected splendour (Exo 24:10) which is cast over the earth. God veils this His radiance which shines forth towards the earth, פּרשׁז אליו עננו, by spreading over it the clouds which are led forth by Him. פּרשׁו is commonly regarded as a Chaldaism for פּרשׁז (Ges. §56, Olsh. §276), but without any similar instance in favour of this vocalizaton of the 3 pr. Piel (Pil.). Although רענן and שׁאנן, Job 15:32; Job 3:18, have given up the i of the Pil., it has been under the influence of the following guttural; and although, moreover, i before Resh sometimes passes into a, e.g., ויּרא, it is more reliable to regard פרשז as inf. absol. (Ew. §141, c): expandendo. Ges. and others regard this פרשז as a mixed form, composed from פרשׁ and פרז; but the verb פרשׁ (with Shin) has not the signification to expand, which is assumed in connection with this derivation; it signifies to separate (also Eze 34:12, vid., Hitzig on that passage), whereas פרשׂ certainly signifies to expand (Job 36:29-30); wherefore the reading פּרשׂז (with Sin), which some Codd. give, is preferred by Bär, and in agreement with him by Luzzatto (vid., Bär’s Leket zebi, p. 244), and it seems to underlie the interpretation where פרשז עליו is translated by עליו (פּרשׂ) פרש, He spreadeth over it (e.g., by Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, Ralbag). But the Talmud, b. Sabbath, 88 b (פירש שדי מזיו שכינתו ועננו עליו, the Almighty separated part of the splendour of His Shechina and His cloud, and laid it upon him, i.e., Moses, as the passage is applied in the Haggada), follows the reading פּרשׁז (with Shin), which is to be retained on account of the want of naturalness in the consonantal combination שׂז; but the word is not to be regarded as a mixed formation (although we do not deny the possibility of such forms in themselves, vid., supra, p. 468), but as an intensive form of פרשׂ formed by Prosthesis and an Arabic change of Sin into Shin, like Arab. fršḥ , fršd , fršṭ , which, being formed from Arab. frš = פּרשׂ (פּרשׂ), to expand, signifies to spread out (the legs).

Job 26:10 passes from the waters above to the lower waters. תּכלית signifies, as in Job 11:7; Job 28:3; Neh 3:21, the extremity, the extreme boundary; and the connection of תּכלית אור is genitival, as the Tarcha by the first word correctly indicates, whereas אור with Munach, the substitute for Rebia mugrasch In this instance (according to Psalter, ii. 503, §2), is a mistake. God has marked out (חן, lxx ἐγύρωσεν) a law, i.e., here according to the sense: a fixed bound (comp. Pro 8:29 with Psa 104:9), over the surface of the waters (i.e., describing a circle over them which defines their circuit) unto the extreme point of light by darkness, i.e., where the light is touched by the darkness. Most expositors (Rosenm., Hirz., Hahn, Schlottm., and others) take עד־תכלית adverbially: most accurately, and refer חג to אור as a second object, which is contrary to the usage of the language, and doubtful and unnecessary. Pareau has correctly interpreted: ad lucis usque tenebrarumque confinia; עם in the local sense, not aeque ac, although it might also have this meaning, as e.g., Ecc 2:16. The idea is, that God has appointed a fixed limit to the waters, as far as to the point at which they wash the terra firma of the extreme horizon, and where the boundary line of the realms of light and darkness is; and the basis of the expression, as Bouillier, by reference to Virgil’s Georg. i. 240f., has shown, is the conception of the ancients, that the earth is surrounded by the ocean, on the other side of which the region of darkness begins. Job 26:11-13 11 The pillars of heaven tremble

And are astonished at His threatening. 12 By His power He rouseth up the sea,

And by His understanding He breaketh Rahab in pieces. 13 By His breath the heavens become cheerful;

His hand hath formed the fugitive dragon.

The mountains towering up to the sky, which seem to support the vault of the sky, are called poetically “the pillars of heaven.” ירופפוּ is Pulal, like יחוללוּ, Job 26:5; the signification of violent and quick motion backwards and forwards is secured to the verb רוּף by the Targ. אתרופף = התפּלּץ, Job 9:6, and the Talm. רפרף of churned milk, blinding eyes (comp. הרף עין, the twinkling of the eye, and Arab. rff , fut. i. o. nictare), flapping wings (comp. Arab. rff and rfrf , movere, motitare alas), of wavering thinking. גּערה is the divine command which looses or binds the powers of nature; the astonishment of the supports of heaven is, according to the radical signification of תּמהּ (cogn. שׁמם), to be conceived of as a torpidity which follows the divine impulse, without offering any resistance whatever. That רגע, Job 26:12, is to be understood transitively, not like Job 7:5, intransitively, is proved by the dependent (borrowed) passages, Isa 51:15; Jer 31:35, from which it is also evident that רגע cannot with the lxx be translated κατέπαυσεν. The verb combines in itself the opposite significations of starting up, i.e., entering into an excited state, and of being startled, from which the significations of stilling (Niph., Hiph.), and of standing back or retreat (Arab. rj‛), branch off. The conjecture גּער after the Syriac version (which translates, go‛ar bejamo) is superfluous. רהב, which here also is translated by the lxx τὸ κῆτος, has been discussed already on Job 9:13. It is not meant of the turbulence of the sea, to which מחץ is not appropriate, but of a sea monster, which, like the crocodile and the dragon, are become an emblem of Pharaoh and his power, as Isa 51:9. has applied this primary passage: the writer of the book of Job purposely abstains from such references to the history of Israel. Without doubt, רהב denotes a demoniacal monster, like the demons that shall be destroyed at the end of the world, one of which is called by the Persians akomano, evil thought, another taromaiti, pride. This view is supported by Job 26:13, where one is not at liberty to determine the meaning by Isa 51:9, and to understand נחשׁ בּרח, like תּנּין in that passage, of Egypt. But this dependent passage is an important indication for the correct rendering of חללה. One thing is certain at the outset, that שׁפרה is not perf. Piel = שׁפרה, and for this reason, that the Dagesh which characterizes Piel cannot be omitted from any of the six mutae; the translation of Jerome, spiritus ejus ornavit coelos, and all similar ones, are therefore false. But it is possible to translate: “by His spirit (creative spirit) the heavens are beauty, His hand has formed the flying dragon.” Thus, in the signification to bring forth (as Pro 25:23; Pro 8:24.), חללה is rendered by Rosenm., Arnh., Vaih., Welte, Renan, and others, of whom Vaih. and Renan, however, do not understand Job 26:13 of the creation of the heavens, but of their illumination. By this rendering Job 26:13 and Job 26:13 are severed, as being without connection; in general, however, the course of thought in the description does not favour the reference of the whole of half of Job 26:13 to the creation. Accordingly, חללה is not to be taken as Pilel from חול (ליל), but after Isa 57:9, as Poel from חלל, according to which the idea of Job 26:13 is determined, since both lines of the verse are most closely connected. (בּריח) נחשׁ בּרח is, to wit, the constellation of the Dragon, ^{▼▼Ralbag, without any ground for it, understands it of the milky way (העגול החלבי), which, according to Rapoport, Pref. to Slonimski’s Toledoth ha-schamajim (1838), was already known to the Talmud b. Berachoth, 58 b, under the name of נהר דנוד.} one of the most straggling constellations, which winds itself between the Greater and Lesser Bears almost half through the polar circle.

“Maximus hic plexu sinuoso elabitur Anguis Circum perque duas in morem fluminis Arctos.” (Virgil, Georg. i. 244f.)

Aratus in Cicero, de nat. Deorum, ii. 42, describes it more graphically, both in general, and in regard to the many stars of different magnitudes which form its body from head to tail. Among the Arabs it is called el - hajje , the serpent, e.g., in Firuzabâdi: the hajje is a constellation between the Lesser Bear (farqadân, the two calves) and the Greater Bear (benât en - na‛sch , the daughters of the bier), “or et - tanı̂n , the dragon, e.g., in one of the authors quoted by Hyde on Ulugh Beigh’s Tables of the Stars, p. 18: the tanîn lies round about the north pole in the form of a long serpent, with many bends and windings.” Thus far the testimony of the old expositors is found in Rosenmüller. The Hebrew name תּלי (the quiver) is perhaps to be distinguished from טלי and דּלי, the Zodiac constellations Aries and Aquarius. ^{▼▼Vid., Wissenschaft, Kunst, Judenthum (1838), S. 220f.}

It is questionable how בּרח is to be understood. The lxx translates δράκοντα ἀποστάτην in this passage, which is certainly incorrect, since בריח beside נחשׁ may naturally be assumed to be an attributive word referring to the motion or form of the serpent. Accordingly, Isa 27:1, ὄφιν φείγοντα is more correct, where the Syr. version is חויא חרמנא, the fierce serpent, which is devoid of support in the language; in the passage before us the Syr. also has חויא דערק, the fleeing serpent, but this translation does not satisfy the more neuter signification of the adjective. Aquila in Isaiah translates ὄφιν μόχλον, as Jerome translates the same passage serpentem vectem (whereas he translates coluber tortuosus in our passage), as though it were בּריח; Symm. is better, and without doubt a substantially similar thought, ὄφιν συγκλείοντα, the serpent that joins by a bolt, which agrees with the traditional Jewish explanation, for the dragon in Aben-Ezra and Kimchi (in Lex.) - after the example of the learned Babylonian teacher of astronomy, Mar-Samuel (died 257), who says of himself that the paths of the heavens are as familiar to him as the places of Nehardea ^{▼▼Vid., Grätz, Geschichte der Juden, iv. 324. On Isa 27:1 Kimchi interprets the מבריח differently: he scares (pushes away).} - is called נחשׁ עקלתון, because it is as though it were wounded, and בריח, because it forms a bar (מבריח) from one end of the sky to the other; or as Sabbatai Donolo (about 94), the Italian astronomer, ^{▼▼Vid., extracts from his המזלות ספר in Joseph Kara’s Comm. on Job, contributed by S. D. Luzzatto in Kerem Chemed, 7th year, S. 57ff.} expresses it: “When God created the two lights (the sun and moon) and the five stars (planets) and the twelve מזלור (the constellations of the Zodiac), He also created the תלי (dragon), to unite these heavenly bodies as by a weaver’s beam (מנור אורגים), and made it stretch itself on the firmament from one end to another as a bar (כבריח), like a wounded serpent furnished with the head and tail.” By this explanation בּריח is either taken directly as בּריח, vectis, in which signification it does not, however, occur elsewhere, or the signification transversus (transversarius) is assigned to the בּריח (= barrı̂ah) with an unchangeable Kametz, - a signification which it might have, for brch Arab. brḥ signifies properly to go through, to go slanting across, of which the meanings to unite slanting and to slip away are only variations. בּריח, notwithstanding, has in the language, so far as it is preserved to us, everywhere the signification fugitivus, and we will also keep to this: the dragon in the heavens is so called, as having the appearance of fleeing and hastening away. But in what sense is it said of God, that He pierces or slays it? In Isa 51:9, where the תנין is the emblem of Egypt (Pharaoh), and Isa 27:1, where נחשׁ בריח is the emblem of Assyria, the empire of the Tigris, the idea of destruction by the sword of Jehovah is clear. The present passage is to be explained according to Job 3:8, where לויתן is only another name for נחש בריח (comp. Isa 27:1). It is the dragon in the heavens which produces the eclipse of the sun, by winding itself round about the sun; and God must continually wound it anew, and thus weaken it, if the sun is to be set free again. That it is God who disperses the clouds of heaven by the breath of His spirit, the representative of which in the elements is the wind, so that the azure becomes visible again; and that it is He who causes the darkening of the sun to cease, so that the earth can again rejoice in the full brightness of that great light, - these two contemplations of the almighty working of God in nature are so expressed by the poet, that he clothes the second in the mythological garb of the popular conception.

In the closing words which now follow, Job concludes his illustrative description: it must indeed, notwithstanding, come infinitely short of the reality. Job 26:14 14 Behold, these are the edges of His ways,

And how do we hear only a whisper thereof!

But the thunder of His might - who comprehendeth it?

These (אלּה retrospective, as in Job 18:21) are only קצות, the extremest end-points or outlines of the ways of God, which Job has depicted; the wondrous fulness of His might, which extends through the whole creation, transcends human comprehension; it is only שׁמץ דּבר therefrom that becomes audible to us men. שׁמץ (שׁמץ) is translated by Symm. here ψιθύρισμα, Job 4:12, ψιτηυρισμός; the Arab. šamiṣa (to speak very quickly, mutter) confirms this idea of the word; Jerome’s translation, vix. parvam stillam sermonis ejus (comp. Job 4:12, venas, tropical for parts), is doubly erroneous: the rendering of the שׁמץ has the antithesis of רעם against it, and דּבר is not to be understood here otherwise than in ערות דּבר, Deu 23:15; Deu 24:1 : shame of something = something that excites a feeling of shame, a whisper of something = some whisper. The notion “somewhat,” which the old expositors attribute to שׁמץ, lies therefore in דבר. מה is exclamatory in a similar manner as in Psa 89:48 : how we hear (נשׁמע, not נשׁמע) only some whisper thereof (בּו partitive, as e.g., Isa 10:22), i.e., how little therefrom is audible to us, only as the murmur of a word, not loud and distinct, which reaches us!

As in the speech of Bildad the poet makes the opposition of the friends to fade away and cease altogether, as incapable of any further counsel, and hence as conquered, so in Job’s closing speech, which consists of three parts, Job 26:1, Job 27:1, Job 29:1, he shows how Job in every respect, as victor, maintains the field against the friends. The friends have neither been able to loose the knot of Job’s lot of suffering, nor the universal distribution of prosperity and misfortune. Instead of loosing the knot of Job’s lot of suffering, they have cut it, by adding to Job’s heavy affliction the invention of heinous guilt as its ground of explanation; and the knot of the contradictions of human life in general with divine justice they have ignored, in order that they may not be compelled to abandon their dogma, that suffering everywhere necessarily presupposes sin, and sin is everywhere necessarily followed by suffering. Even Job, indeed, is not at present able to solve either one or other of the mysteries; but while the friends’ treatment of these mysteries is untrue, he honours the truth, and keenly perceives that which is mysterious. Then he proves by testimony and an appeal to facts, that the mystery may be acknowledged without therefore being compelled to abandon the fear of God. Job firmly holds to the objective reality and the testimony of his consciousness; in the fear of God he places himself above all those contradictions which are unsolvable by and perplexing to human reason; his faith triumphs over the rationalism of the friends, which is devoid of truth, of justice, and of love.

Job first answers Bildad, Job 26:1. He characterizes his poor reply as what it is: as useless, and not pertinent in regard to the questions before them: it is of no service to him, it does not affect him, and is, moreover, a borrowed weapon. For he also is conscious of and can praise God’s exalted and awe-inspiring majesty. He has already shown this twice, Job 9:4-10; Job 12:13-25, and shows here for the third time: its operation is not confined merely to those creatures that immediately surround God in the heavens; it extends, without being restrained by the sea, even down to the lower world; and as it makes the angels above to tremble, so there it sets the shades in consternation. From the lower world, Job’s contemplation rises to the earth, as a body suspended in space without support; to the clouds above, which contain the upper waters without bursting, and veil the divine throne, of which the sapphire blue of heaven is the reflection; and then he speaks of the sea lying between Sheôl and heaven, which is confined within fixed bounds, at the extreme boundaries of which light passes over into darkness; - he celebrates all this as proof of the creative might of God. Then he describes the sovereign power of God in the realm of His creation, how He shakes the pillars of heaven, rouses the sea, breaks the monster in pieces, lights up the heavens by chasing away the clouds and piercing the serpent, and thus setting free the sun. But all these - thus he closes - are only meagre outlines of the divine rule, only a faint whisper, which is heard by us as coming from the far distance. Who has the comprehension necessary to take in and speak exhaustively of all the wonders of His infinite nature, which extends throughout the whole creation? From such a profound recognition and so glorious a description of the exaltation of God, the infinite distance between God and man is most clearly proved. Job has adequately shown that his whole soul is full of that which Bildad is anxious to teach him; a soul that only requires a slight impulse to make it overflow with such praise of God, as is not wanting in an universal perception of God, nor is it full of wicked devices. When therefore Bildad maintains against Job that no man is righteous before such an exalted God, Job ought indeed to take it as a warning against such unbecoming utterances concerning God as those which have escaped him; but the universal sinfulness of man is no ground of explanation for his sufferings, for there is a righteousness which avails before God; and of this, job, the suffering servant of God, has a consciousness that cannot be shaken.

‏ Job 27:1-12

Job 27:1-7 1 Then Job continued to take up his proverb, and said: 2 As God liveth, who hath deprived me of my right,

And the Almighty, who hath sorely saddened my soul - 3 For still all my breath is in me,

And the breath of Eloah in my nostrils - 4 My lips do not speak what is false,

And my tongue uttereth not deceit! 5 Far be it from me, to grant that you are in the right:

Till I die I will not remove my innocence from me. 6 My righteousness I hold fast, and let it not go:

My heart reproacheth not any of my days. 7 Mine enemy must appear as an evil-doer,

And he who riseth up against me as unrighteous.

The friends are silent, Job remains master of the discourse, and his continued speech is introduced as a continued שׂאת משׁלו (after the analogy of the phrase נשׂא קול), as in Num 23:7 and further on, the oracles of Balaam. משׁל is speech of a more elevated tone and more figurative character; here, as frequently, the unaffected outgrowth of an elevated solemn mood. The introduction of the ultimatum, as משׁל, reminds one of “the proverb (el - methel) seals it” in the mouth of the Arab, since in common life it is customary to use a pithy saying as the final proof at the conclusion of a speech.

Job begins with an asseveration of his truthfulness (i.e., the agreement of his confession with his consciousness) by the life of God. From this oath, which in the form bi - hajât allâh has become later on a common formula of assurance, R. Joshua, in his tractate Sota, infers that Job served God from love to Him, for we only swear by the life of that which we honour and love; it is more natural to conclude that the God by whom on the one hand, he believes himself to be so unjustly treated, still appears to him, on the other hand, to be the highest manifestation of truth. The interjectional clause: living is God! is equivalent to, as true as God liveth. That which is affirmed is not what immediately follows: He has set aside my right, and the Almighty has sorely grieved my soul (Raschi); but הסיר משׁפטי and המר נפשׁי are attributive clauses, by which what is denied in the form of an oath introduced by אם (as Gen 42:15; 1Sa 14:45; 2Sa 11:11, Ges. §155, 2, f) is contained in Job 27:4; his special reference to the false semblance of an evil-doer shows that semblance which suffering casts upon him, but which he constantly repudiates as surely not lying, as that God liveth. Among moderns, Schlottm. (comp. Ges. §150, 3), like most of the old expositors, translates: so long as my breath is in me,...my lips shall speak no wrong, so that Job 27:3 and Job 27:4 together contain what is affirmed. By (1) כּי indeed sometimes introduces that which shall happen as affirmed by oath, Jer 22:5; Jer 49:13; but here that which shall not take place is affirmed, which would be introduced first in a general form by כּי explic. s. recitativum, then according to its special negative contents by אם, - a construction which is perhaps possible according to syntax, but it is nevertheless perplexing; (2) it may perhaps be thought that “the whole continuance of my breath in me” is conceived as accusative and adverbial, and is equivalent to, so long as my breath may remain in me (כל עוד, as long as ever, like the Arab. cullama, as often as ever); but the usage of the language does not favour this explanation, for 2Sa 1:9, נפשׁי בי כל־עוד, signifies my whole soul (my full life) is still in me; and we have a third instance of this prominently placed כל per hypallagen in Hos 14:3, עון כל־תשׂא, omnem auferas iniquitatem, Ew. §289, a (comp. Ges. §114, rem. 1). Accordingly, with Ew., Hirz., Hahn, and most modern expositors, we take Job 27:3 as a parenthetical confirmatory clause, by which Job gives the ground of his solemn affirmation that he is still in possession of his full consciousness, and cannot help feeling and expressing the contradiction between his lot of suffering, which brand shim as an evil-doer, and his moral integrity. The נשׁמתי which precedes the רוח signifies, according to the prevailing usage of the language, the intellectual, and therefore self-conscious, soul of man (Psychol. S. 76f.). This is in man and in his nostrils, inasmuch as the breath which passes in and out by these is the outward and visible form of its being, which is in every respect the condition of life (ib. S. 82f.). The suff. of נשׁמתי is unaccented; on account of the word which follows being a monosyllable, the tone has retreated (נסוג אחור, to use a technical grammatical expression), as e.g., also in Job 19:25; Job 20:2; Psa 22:20. Because he lives, and, living, cannot deny his own existence, he swears that his own testimony, which is suspected by the friends, and on account of which they charge him with falsehood, is perfect truth.

Job 27:4 is not to be translated: “my lips shall never speak what is false;” for it is not a resolve which Job thus strongly makes, after the manner of a vow, but the agreement of his confession, which he has now so frequently made, and which remains unalterable, with the abiding fact. Far be from me - he continues in Job 27:5 - to admit that you are right (חלילה לּי with unaccented ah, not of the fem., comp. Job 34:10, but of direction: for a profanation to me, i.e., let it be profane to me, Ew. §329, a, Arab. hâshâ li , in the like sense); until I expire (prop.: sink together), I will not put my innocence (תּמּה, perfection, in the sense of purity of character) away from me, i.e., I will not cease from asserting it. I will hold fast (as ever) my righteousness, and leave it not, i.e., let it not go or fall away; my heart does not reproach even one of my days. מיּמי is virtually an obj. in a partitive sense: mon coeur ne me reproche pas un seul de mes jours (Renan). The heart is used here as the seat of the conscience, which is the knowledge possessed by the heart, by which it excuses or accuses a man (Psychol. S. 134); חרף (whence חרף, the season in which the fruits are gathered) signifies carpere, to pluck = to pinch, lash, inveigh against. Jos. Kimchi and Ralbag explain: my heart draws not back) from the confession of my innocence) my whole life long (as Maimonides explains נחרפת, Lev 19:20, of the female slave who is inclined to, i.e., stands near to, the position of a free woman), by comparison with the Arabic inḥarafa , deflectere; it is not, however, Arab. ḥrf , but chrf , decerpere, that is to be compared in the tropical sense of the prevailing usage of the Hebrew specified. The old expositors were all misled by the misunderstood partitive מימי, which they translated ex (= inde a) diebus meis. There is in Job 27:7 no ground for taking יהי, with Hahn, as a strong affirmative, as supposed in Job 18:12, and not as expressive of desire; but the meaning is not: let my opponents be evil-doers, I at least am not one (Hirz.). The voluntative expresses far more emotion: the relation must be reversed; he who will brand me as an evil-doer, must by that very act brand himself as such, inasmuch as the מרשׁיע of a צדיק really shows himself to be a רשׁע, and by recklessly judging the righteous, is bringing down upon himself a like well-merited judgment. The כּ is the so-called Caph veritatis, since כּ, instar, signifies not only similarity, but also quality. Instead of קימי, the less manageable, primitive form, which the poet used in Job 22:20 (comp. p. 483), and beside which קם (קום, 2Ki 16:7) does not occur in the book, we here find the more usual form מתקוממי (comp. Job 20:27). ^{▼▼In Beduin the enemy is called qômâni (vid., supra, on Job 24:12, p. 505), a denominative from qôm, Arab. qawm , war, feud; but qôm has also the signification of a collective of qômâni, and one can also say: entum wa - ijânâ qôm , you and we are enemies, and bênâtna qôm , there is war between us. - Wetzst.}

The description of the misfortune of the ungodly which now follows, beginning with כי, requires no connecting thought, as for instance: My enemy must be accounted as ungodly, on account of his hostility; I abhor ungodliness, for, etc.; but that he who regards him as a רשׁע is himself a רשׁע, Job shows from the fact of the רשׁע having no hope in death, whilst, when dying, he can give no confident hope of a divine vindication of his innocence. Job 27:8-12 8 For what is the hope of the godless, when He cutteth off,

When Eloah taketh away his soul? 9 Will God hear his cry

When distress cometh upon him? 10 Or can he delight himself in the Almighty,

Can he call upon Eloah at all times? 11 I will teach you concerning the hand of God,

I will not conceal the dealings of the Almighty. 12 Behold, ye have all seen it,

Why then do ye cherish foolish notions?

In comparing himself with the רשׁע, Job is conscious that he has a God who does not leave him unheard, in whom he delights himself, and to whom he can at all times draw near; as, in fact, Job’s fellowship with God rests upon the freedom of the most intimate confidence. He is not one of the godless; for what is the hope of one who is estranged from God, when he comes to die? He has no God on whom his hope might establish itself, to whom it could cling. The old expositors err in many ways respecting Job 27:8, by taking בצע, abscindere (root בץ), in the sense of (opes) corradere (thus also more recently Rosenm. after the Targ., Syr., and Jer.), and referring ישׁל to שׁלה in the signification tranquillum esse (thus even Blumenfeld after Ralbag and others). נפשׁו is the object to both verbs, and בצע נפשׁ, abscindere animam, to cut off the thread of life, is to be explained according to Job 6:9; Isa 38:12. שׁלח נפשׁ, extrahere animam (from שׁלה, whence שׁליח Arab. salan, the after-birth, cogn. שׁלל . Arab. sll , נשׁל Arab. nsl , nṯl , nšl), is of similar signification, according to another figure, wince the body is conceived of as the sheath (נדנה, Dan 7:15) of the soul ^{▼▼On the similar idea of the body, as the kosha (sheath) of the soul, among the Hindus, vid., Psychol. S. 227.} (comp. Arab. sll in the universal signification evaginare ensem). The fut. apoc. Kal ישׁל (= ישׁל) is therefore in meaning equivalent to the intrans. ישּׁל, Deu 28:40 (according to Ew. §235, c, obtained from this by change of vowel), decidere; and Schnurrer’s supposition that ישׁל, like the Arab. ysl, is equivalent to ישׁאל (when God demands it), or such a violent correction as De Lagarde's ^{▼▼Anm. zur griech. Uebers. der Proverbien (1863), S. VI.f., where the first reason given for this improvement of the text is this, that the usual explanation, according to which ישׁל and יבצע have the same subj. and obj. standing after the verb, is altogether contrary to Semitic usage. But this assertion is groundless, as might be supposed from the very beginning. Thus, e.g., the same obj. is found after two verbs in Job 20:19, and the same subj. and obj. in Neh 3:20.} (when he is in distress יצק, when one demeans his soul with a curse ישּׁאל בּאלה), is unnecessary.

The ungodly man, Job goes on to say, has no God to hear his cry when distress comes upon him; he cannot delight himself (יתענּג, pausal form of יתענג, the primary form of יתענג) in the Almighty; he cannot call upon Eloah at any time (i.e., in the manifold circumstances of life under which we are called to feel the dependence of our nature). Torn away from God, he cannot be heard, he cannot indeed pray and find any consolation in God. It is most clearly manifest here, since Job compares his condition of suffering with that of a חנף, what comfort, what power of endurance, yea, what spiritual joy in the midst of suffering (התענג, as Job 22:26; Psa 37:4, Psa 37:11; Isa 55:2; Isa 58:13), which must all remain unknown to the ungodly, he can draw from his fellowship with God; and seizing the very root of the distinction between the man who fears God and one who is utterly godless, his view of the outward appearance of the misfortune of both becomes changed; and after having allowed himself hitherto to be driven from one extreme to another by the friends, as the heat of the controversy gradually cools down, and as, regaining his independence, he stands before them as their teacher, he now experiences the truth of docendo discimus in rich abundance. I will instruct you, says he, in the hand, i.e., the mode of action, of God (בּ just as in Psa 25:8, Psa 25:12; Psa 32:8; Pro 4:11, of the province and subject of instruction); I will not conceal עם־שׁדּי אשׁר, i.e., according to the sense of the passage: what are the principles upon which He acts; for that which is with (אם) any one is the matter of his consciousness and volition (vid., on Job 23:10).Job 27:12 is of the greatest importance in the right interpretation of what follows from Job 27:13 onwards. The instruction which Job desires to impart to the friends has reference to the lot of the evil-doer; and when he says: Behold, ye yourselves have beheld (learnt) it all, - in connection with which it is to be observed that אתּם כּלּכם does not signify merely vos omnes, but vosmet ipsi omnes, - he grants to them what he appeared hitherto to deny, that the lot of the evil-doer, certainly in the rule, although not without exceptions, is such as they have said. The application, however, which they have made of this abiding fact of experience, as and remains all the more false: Wherefore then (זה makes the question sharper) are ye vain (blinded) in vanity (self-delusion), viz., in reference to me, who do not so completely bear about the characteristic marks of a רשׁע? The verb הבל signifies to think and act vainly (without ground or connection), 2Ki 17:15 (comp. ἐματαιώθησαν, Rom 1:21); the combination הבל הבל is not to be judged of according to Ges. §138, rem. 1, as it is also by Ew. §281, a, but הבל may also be taken as the representative of the gerund, as e.g., עריה, Hab 3:9.

In the following strophe (Job 27:13) Job now begins as Zophar (Job 20:29) concluded. He gives back to the friends the doctrine they have fully imparted to him. They have held the lot of the evil-doer before him as a mirror, that he may behold himself in it and be astounded; he holds it before them, that they may perceive how not only his bearing under suffering, but also the form of his affliction, is of a totally different kind.